[sebhc] Re: Re-creating actual floppies from archive

[dwight elvey]

Hi Dan
No telling how long these sat in the stock room before they were sold.
What was the problem with these anyway? I do know that the boards
with the combination cassette/serial had problems of slow opto-isolators
and may not run at the higher baud rates.
Is it a race problem or a glitch problem?
Dwight



>From: Dan Lanciani <ddl-cctech at danlan.com>
>Reply-To: sebhc at sebhc.org
>To: sebhc at sebhc.org
>Subject: Re: [sebhc] Re: Re-creating actual floppies from archive
>Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:56:07 -0500 (EST)
>Received: from mx1.evocative.com ([67.133.33.40]) by 
>bay0-mc11-f11.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 
>31 Mar 2006 12:57:50 -0800
>Received: from mail.evocative.com (blue.berkeley.evocative.com 
>[67.133.33.36])by mx1.evocative.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTPid 
>BD047188B9; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:57:48 -0800 (PST)
>Received: from blue.berkeley.evocative.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])by 
>mail.evocative.com (8.13.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id k2VKuF2u044254for 
><staunch89er-sebhc-outgoing at blue.berkeley.evocative.com>; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 
>12:56:15 -0800 (PST)
>Received: (from majordom at localhost)by blue.berkeley.evocative.com 
>(8.13.6/8.12.5/Submit) id k2VKuEjh044253for staunch89er-sebhc-outgoing; 
>Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:56:14 -0800 (PST)
>Received: from mx1.evocative.com (mx1.berkeley.evocative.com 
>[67.133.33.40])by mail.evocative.com (8.13.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id 
>k2VKuE0d044248for <sebhc at sebhc.org>; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:56:14 -0800 (PST)
>Received: from ss10.danlan.com (ss10.danlan.com [199.33.144.62])by 
>mx1.evocative.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 487081EF41for 
><sebhc at sebhc.org>; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:56:10 -0800 (PST)
>Received: (from ddl at localhost)by ss10.danlan.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id 
>PAA00644for sebhc at sebhc.org; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:56:07 -0500 (EST)
>X-Message-Info: UZmYcfFpTCfy0mATuJ0E8ccAMcElzXyQVHkXc1AQlqY=
>X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall at evocative.com
>Precedence: list
>X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall at evocative.com
>Return-Path: sebhc-bounces at sebhc.org
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Mar 2006 20:57:50.0614 (UTC) 
>FILETIME=[C5AACB60:01C65505]
>
>|>> The original cards had a timing problem; they worked with old parts,
>|>> but then National "improved" the 8250... The newer chips didn't work
>|>> reliably in the old card.
>|
>|Dan Lanciani wrote:
>|> Did this happen with the H8's serial card as well?
>|
>|Probably, but the "new" 8250's didn't exist when the H8 was built so it
>|was never a problem.
>
>Hmm.  But I bought the H8-4 a long time after I bought the H-8.  (Actually,
>I don't think the H8-4 was available initially.)  So had H8-4 production
>stopped before any of the "new" 8250s could have been shipped?  It seems
>too much of a conicidence that I had 3 out of 4 bad 8250s for some other
>random reson(s)...
>
>				Dan Lanciani
>				ddl at danlan.*com
>--
>Delivered by the SEBHC Mailing List


--
Delivered by the SEBHC Mailing List